How many people think they must CC if they've a LTCF?

[gunperson003]

I was finishing up on my trip plans, called the DoubleTree in Pittsburgh about their weapons policy and the woman seemed to think there was a law against Open Carry. Not only did she mention what I just mentioned previously, she said her husband had a license to carry and he must carry concealed.

wtf?

[rwilson452]

Take the flier with you when you go. Take bunch with you when you go. Except for filthydelpia there are no laws against open carry, with or without a LTCF. They must have learned that urban legend for one of our not so gun friendly sheriffs.

http://paopencarry.org/PennsylvaniaGunRights.pdf

[gunperson003]

Originally Posted by rwilson452

Take the flier with you when you go. Take bunch with you when you go. Except for filthydelpia there are no laws against open carry, with or without a LTCF. They must have learned that urban legend for one of our not so gun friendly sheriffs.

Oh trust me, I'm taking 50 copies of the flier with me. There is one thing I hate more than liers, its people who are misinformed.

[markheck1]

I used to.....until I found this site, and opencarry.org

[Zef_66]

I used to think the same thing. Until I came here. And talking to my brother and dad, they thought the same thing.

Its crazy how we come across these ideas...

[exceltoexcel]

I wrote this over a year ago, before paopencarry wrote theirs, it is amazing how similar the two are I posted it here way before they posted theirs


Open Carry Legal in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Commonwealth v. Hawkins
In all parts of Pennsylvania, persons who are licensed may carry concealed firearms. 18 Pa.C.S. § 6108. *Except in Philadelphia, firearms may be carried openly without a license*. See Ortiz v. Commonwealth, ___ Pa. ___, ___, 681 A.2d 152, 155 (1996) (*only in Philadelphia must a person obtain a license for carrying a firearm whether it is unconcealed or concealed; in other parts of the Commonwealth, unconcealed firearms do not require a license*). The Commonwealth takes the radical position that police have a duty to stop and frisk when they receive information from any source that a suspect has a gun. Since it is not illegal to carry a licensed gun in Pennsylvania,4 it is difficult to see where this shocking idea originates, notwithstanding the Commonwealth's fanciful and histrionic references to maniacs who may spray schoolyards with gunfire and assassins of public figures who may otherwise go undetected. Even if the Constitution of Pennsylvania would permit such invasive police activity as the Commonwealth proposes -- which it does not -- such activity seems more likely to endanger than to protect the public. Unnecessary police intervention, by definition, produces the possibility of conflict where none need exist.* Contrary to the Commonwealth's view, the public will receive its full measure of protection by police who act within the restraints imposed on them by Art. I, § 8 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania and this court's relevant case law. Upon receiving unverified information that a certain person is engaged in illegal activity, the police may always observe the suspect and conduct their own investigation. If police surveillance produces a reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct, the suspect may, of course, be briefly stopped and questioned (the Terry investigative stop),
Commonwealth v. Ortiz
53 Pa.C.S. section 13133. Philadelphia appellants assert that they are limited by the acts of the General Assembly only if those acts are applicable in the entire commonwealth, and the firearms statute is not. In particular, they argue that in Philadelphia County, the legislature requires that a person must be licensed to carry weapons openly and not concealed from sight,*
18 Pa.C.S. section 6108, [footnote 1] whereas in all other counties of Pennsylvania, *weapons may be carried openly without a license*, 18 Pa.C.S. section 6106. [footnote 2]\

Only the Issuing Authority has the Right to Confiscate a Pennsylvania LTCF
§ 6109. Licenses
Revocation.--A license to carry firearms may be revoked by the issuing authority for good cause. A license to carry firearms shall be revoked by the issuing authority for any reason stated in subsection (e)(1) which occurs during the term of the permit. Notice of revocation shall be in writing and shall state the specific reason for revocation. Notice shall be sent by certified mail, and, at that time, a copy shall be forwarded to the commissioner. An individual whose license is revoked shall surrender the license to the issuing authority within five days of receipt of the notice. An individual whose license is revoked may appeal to the court of common pleas for the judicial district in which the individual resides. An individual who violates this section commits a summary offense.
LTCF Only Required if Carrying Concealed or in a Vehicle
§ 6106. Firearms not to be carried without a license.
(a) Offense defined.--Any person who carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license under this chapter commits a felony of the third degree.

Possible Penalty for Police Actions against a citizens lawful possession of firearms
§ 5301. Official oppression.
A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if, knowing that his conduct is illegal, he: subjects another to arrest, detention, search, seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien or other infringement of personal or property rights; or denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.

Terroristic threats/Disorderly conduct not applicable to lawful open carrying of a firearm
§ 2706. Terroristic threats.
(a) Offense defined. A person commits the crime of terroristic threats if the person communicates, either directly or indirectly, a threat to: commit any crime of violence with intent to terrorize another; cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation; or otherwise cause serious public inconvenience, or cause terror or serious public inconvenience with reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience.
(e) Definition.--As used in this section, the term "communicates" means conveys in person or by written or electronic means, including telephone, electronic mail, Internet, facsimile, telex and similar transmissions.
§ 5503. Disorderly conduct.
(a) Offense defined.--A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he: engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior; makes unreasonable noise; uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.

Legitimate purpose to open or conceal carry a firearm: Section 21. The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.

[gunperson003]

Well, I live in Alaska right now. I'm a resident of Alaska... The feeling I'm getting right now is the same frustrating feeling when I know more on Programming/IT/Security related topics of my older friends. Kind of hard I don't have any real people to look up to anymore, everyone learns from me, even professors at universities.

*frustrated*

>:/ This is exactly why I memorize state statutes/city laws/borough+county laws before moving anywhere. Correcting misinformation makes me feel great, but it also makes me feel awkward when they are older than me. The later is 99.9% of the case, so I usually feel awkward most of the time.

Get me in a room with a person who has a head bigger than the enclosing room through, I'll have a fun blast no matter what his/her age(referring to correcting professors ^_^)

[1blindref]

I also did until I found this board.
There is so much to be learned here.

[mardo]

For twenty years I had a protction permit for concealed carry before I found this site. Now I have a LTCF. This place is great!

[jofreder]

in the Hawkins Case I see 4 judges, 2 concur and 2 dissenting, how does this result in a Win for Hawkins or the rest of us? Isn't this a tie? Am I missing something?